Talk:Battletide
Magical damage from battletide I have found that the +2 bonus damage from Battletide is magical damage and isn't prevented by damage resistances - similar to Divine Favor. Can anyone confirm this? TheGroove 17:04, 23 October 2006 (PDT) *Damage magical or divine are unblock able by any damage resistance if they are apply directly to the PC. I don't remember if that apply also for negative and positive energy. --ILKAY 14:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC) :*It is not the damage type that makes them unblockable, but rather that they all come from the damage increase command. Non-physical damage from this command has its own +20 cap and is not affected by damage resistance, immunity, or vulnerability. WhiZard 20:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC) Will save Additionally I would like to point out from testing in-game and taking a look at the script that the aura applied to enemies requires a will save to fail before the penalty is applied. If anyone has evidence otherwise please revert. 03:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC) *There indeed a will save, SAVING_THROW_TYPE_NEGATIVE if i remember well the script. --ILKAY 14:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC) Disapear It disapear when the target leave the circle by moving at high speed. If it exceed a 5 feet per second. It rarely happen with battletide, it mostly happen with circle of protection versus alignement or invisbility sphere --ILKAY 01:22, April 26, 2010 (UTC) Damage Penalty What exactly is affected by the damage penalty? Is it the Magical damage type only, spells only, any energy damage, or what? -- 17:06, 13 May 2012 * It is both any magical damage bonus on a weapon and any magical damage increase effect (e.g. divine favor). WhiZard 03:14, May 14, 2012 (UTC) Stacking or Coexisting? As a reaction on your latest change with a summary of "Does not stack with itself. COEXISTING IS NOT STACKING!": Why so mad? I added an useful information this wiki didn't provided before. And your latest change is just word-splitting. I even think you are wrong. I mean, you are correct, the exact bonuses from battletide does not stack, but thats not what the spell does. Spell does only one thing and that is creation of the effect. In this way, multiple casting of this spell stacks, allowing to create multiple AOE objects. Also the chance to affect creature stacks: each aura makes a separate SR check (allowing to remove mantle or passing SR) and saving throw so the chance of this spell affect enemy target is significally greater when stacked/coexisted. I am not a first who used this word with conjuction to AOEs, many PWs claims that AOEs do not stack in their modules - though they always meant cloud-like AOEs - that also circle AOEs stack weren't clear. That way or another, your rage-edits and summaries are more and more agressive. Anyway - since this is same for all AOEs then, maybe this note should be removed and a fact that all AOEs coexists should be added into area of effect article to avoid notes overflow (something that starts to be a problem with so many issues and bugs in nwn spells). 08:03, January 31, 2013 (UTC) But yes, there are other spells that coexists such as ability boosts. Yet it is not usual (except of fact that without special scripting (removespelleffects) it is default behavior), many (and I guess most actually) spells does not coexists. This case is different than bull's strength, as its not only defensive but also an offensive spell. BTW is there a "coexisting" defined somewhere? I couldn't find any reference to it anywhere on this wiki - though you behave like this is basic info known to everyone. 11:33, January 31, 2013 (UTC) Radius of AoE vs. Actual Graphic I've set up a measuring grid to check the area of effect of auras. I believe the grid is fairly accurate within a tenth of a meter anyway. Battletide's AoE is listed at 5 m. yet the graphic circle is measuring at 4.06 and exactly overlaps the slightly different color circle of Magic Circle of Alignment. Magic Circle's AoE is listed at 3.3 m (though appears as the same 4.06 m. graphic). My question is: Is the graphic circle just supposed to be a rough estimate of the actual AoE or should it match the AoE radius? I assume the dimensions are dictated within a 2da but not sure how this works i.e. if there are separate values for the AoE vs. the graphic. Can someone please confirm that the radius of the graphic circle for Battletide appears about 20% smaller than where the effect is supposed to cover? I'll assume a similar situation exists for Magic Circle but larger and only about 15% bigger than the stated AoE itself. TIA for any explanation and/or confirmation.--Iconclast (talk) 03:02, June 7, 2016 (UTC) *The 2da governing dimensions is vfx_persistent.2da. There both Battletide and Magic circle are listed at a radius of 3.3 (medium). I am not sure what measuring grid you are using, but the on-enter script does trigger fairly close to where you visually see the circle. WhiZard (talk) 03:40, June 7, 2016 (UTC) :*I use a no-frills "utility" tileset based on the standard 10-meter toolset grid that shows smaller increments via hoizontal and vertical lines with an x-y origin marker so is reliant on the accuracy of the Aurora gridline placement. The Magic Circle visual seemed fairly close to that described in the wiki article but Battletide appeared significantly smaller. Thanks for explaining the source of my confusion, checking the trigger distance and making the change to the article, Whizard.--Iconclast (talk) 15:12, June 7, 2016 (UTC) * The .2da mentioned by WhiZard defines the size of the affected area. The visual that you asked about is vpm_circvisage.mdl. The only thing that can cause the radius of the visual to match the radius of the effect is communication between the person who created the .2da and the person who created the visual effect model. In principle, the visual and the effect could have different sizes. In fact, the visual used for battletide is the same visual used for aura of unearthly visage, and the latter's effect radius is 4. Same visual effect, but different radius for what is affected. --The Krit (talk) 17:39, June 7, 2016 (UTC) :* Ahhh... thanks for chiming in on the topic, TK. ;) That explains the discrepancy. My visual measurement was pretty accurate after all. I've always had difficulty judging the in-game distances specified by the spell effects so was hoping that auras could help me gauge them better, which it can to some degree (i.e. Darkness AoE is particularly difficult to judge due to the gradually-faded visual). On a PnP board, things like this are easy to determine, but in-game, and especially with different camera angles, it can become vague. The insight you guys have provided really helps understand the limitation of visual cues provided by the designers. --Iconclast (talk) 20:17, June 7, 2016 (UTC)